-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
WBL Rule Change Thread
- Thread starter OU11
- Start date
doh
THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Yeah I do this every year. In fact I have 30 guys on my 40-man this year which is a lot for me. I've lost some players I would've liked on my AAA over the last two years doing this: Theile to Buffalo, Lentulov to you, Vaindrakh to Istanbul, Inan to Cairo and probably more I can't think of but IMO it's worth it. You save $ both this year and with your extensions, they aren't that hard to replace and you improve your budget by trimming as much fat as possible.
The one reason I decided to go with 30 this year on my 40-man was spring training. I have 3-4 guys I added to the roster that had zero chance of making my Opening Day roster I just wanted up to limit injuries during ST.
But the big thing is without a Rule V draft you can stash guy on your AAA team that IRL would be on your 40-man and save 490k/year per player by not having them on your 40.
Why would AA need to be pushed back too?
fignuts
See You Next Wednesday
All that is needed is turning the option on in game. The date is December. So 2042 will give folks 2 offseasons to get rosters ready.
If the commish is continuing advancing from Arb to FA in Feb, then it is one added sim in the offseason sandwiched tween Arb and FA.
GM's can set the list round by round (set it for 1 round and copypasta the rest). Every player picked must have space on the new teams 40-man roster.
No ootp utility/website needed.
Done.
If the commish is continuing advancing from Arb to FA in Feb, then it is one added sim in the offseason sandwiched tween Arb and FA.
GM's can set the list round by round (set it for 1 round and copypasta the rest). Every player picked must have space on the new teams 40-man roster.
No ootp utility/website needed.
Done.
If I'm reading it right (have to relearn what it does) this is for guys who are ready for the WBL now since you have to keep them on the active roster for 90 days. Who is even ready for that that would be eligible? What if you set your list and end up getting 5 guys you have to put on your active roster? Maybe I'm just not understanding its purpose fully
EDIT: I really don't want to seem like I'm trying to shit on the Rule 5, I just really don't get what its purpose would be in the the league. It just seems like it will force players to be on the 40 man after 21 if they are any good
EDIT: I really don't want to seem like I'm trying to shit on the Rule 5, I just really don't get what its purpose would be in the the league. It just seems like it will force players to be on the 40 man after 21 if they are any good
Last edited:
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
doh
THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
If you draft someone in the Rule V Draft, you have to keep them on the 25-man for the entire season. If you don't then they must go through waivers after being first offered back to the team that you drafted them from for half the price.
You aren't going to get stars in this by any means but the point would be to make people make decisions quicker. Just looking at Tankee's roster for arguments sake people I'd consider Rule 5ing prior to this year: Rafael Gomez, Howard. Goosens on his AA team would need to be on the 40-man next year. You can get useful people onto your rosters.
It'd add some cost to teams too.
Try to piss him off so he declines that option. That's your best bet.
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
Can I call his mother a crack whore?
doh
THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Well yea that's obviously the big problem but having a bunch of terrible players on your roster stealing money from you is also a problem.
Okay so the ratings don't change automatically, the ratings we are shown right now are the same as in 14. I do have the option to make it relative to the WBL though which means that if you see a guy with a 50 rating you know he will be league average (since it is based on the league as a whole). You know a guy that is rated as a 60 will be one standard deviation higher than league average.
Which would you guys prefer? The way it is now doesn't really tell you what kind of player you are getting as it is based on absolutes and not what is currently in the league.
Which would you guys prefer? The way it is now doesn't really tell you what kind of player you are getting as it is based on absolutes and not what is currently in the league.
Yes, could go one step further and elimate that too tho
doh
THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
They have to be on your ML roster the whole year no matter if they are on the DL or not. The rule is IF they are on the DL then they must have 90 healthy days to count as their Rule 5 year. Let's say the player is on your roster and healthy for 80 days then the next year they have to be on your roster healthy for 10 days.
I like the position based star ratings. It helps you get a quick take of the position depth and talent.
League based 80-20 ratings are interesting. What are your thoughts on that?
Personally I'm for it, although it makes it a bit easier to make decisions. That is the catch with it, it is based on the league in this case so you know for sure if a guy is league average or not
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
doh
THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Yeah I think this would've been better for the UBL when we had problems with teams getting massive profits because it would've added a cost. The financials in the WBL have been a lot better.
To me it's more about making people put guys on 40 mans to a) make them spend the $490k per year on them and b) have to make decisions sooner. The way the game is set up there is no reason to have guys on 40-man unless you are ready for them to be on your 25-man.
I like it if the stars stay position based.
Yeah if you look at the options only the last one takes position out of it
Lloyd Carr
Well-Known Member
Is Buffalo going to be negatively affected? If not, I don't care. If so, no thanks.
Lloyd Carr
Well-Known Member
Lets play with the relative ratings on.
jdlikewhoa
Well-Known Member
Turn them on
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, but the following post is assuming that right now the ratings are based on our AI scout ratings and those are not averaged against other players and the proposal is that the scout ratings would be averaged out against the league before we see the ratings.
If that's the case, I'd be very concerned about relative ratings. This both dumbs-down and makes the league more complicated at the same time. GMs won't have to do their own moneyball analysis into value of specific qualities of players that are in high demand. Meanwhile you'd have to reverse engineer what your scouts actually think of the player somehow.
It's also completely unrealistic. Scout ratings don't get averaged out, you have your stats, you advanced metrics which are often based on league averages, and then your raw ratings from your scouts. You're basically "advanced metricing" your 20-80 rating which should be a raw number. This really seems like it would change the league and how we evaluate players a ton.
Totally against Rule 5, I don't have time for it for the payoff is next to nothing. It would be a hassle tracking the 40 man with stricter rules and I can just picture Tankee sitting around and make 20 picks because his UBL roster is crap anyway.
If that's the case, I'd be very concerned about relative ratings. This both dumbs-down and makes the league more complicated at the same time. GMs won't have to do their own moneyball analysis into value of specific qualities of players that are in high demand. Meanwhile you'd have to reverse engineer what your scouts actually think of the player somehow.
It's also completely unrealistic. Scout ratings don't get averaged out, you have your stats, you advanced metrics which are often based on league averages, and then your raw ratings from your scouts. You're basically "advanced metricing" your 20-80 rating which should be a raw number. This really seems like it would change the league and how we evaluate players a ton.
Totally against Rule 5, I don't have time for it for the payoff is next to nothing. It would be a hassle tracking the 40 man with stricter rules and I can just picture Tankee sitting around and make 20 picks because his UBL roster is crap anyway.